Author Topic: Searching for GOD...  (Read 3819742 times)

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32360
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51525 on: September 09, 2024, 05:16:22 PM »
The material universe certainly has no remit to care about anything.
The concept of likes and dislikes arise from conscious awareness for which we have no material definition or explanation.
Before you can get to the propagation of genes or the concept of survival - there is a monumental task of creating living cells capable of reproduction, followed by the organisation of these cells to facilitate sexual reproduction.
Reproduction doesn't need to be sexual. Bacteria are vastly simpler than even the simplest eukaryotic cell and they mostly reproduce asexually. People have set up test tube experiments in which RNA was able to reproduce with just a few enzymes. Who knows how much simpler you could go.
Quote
Here is an interesting short video of a top eye surgeon who was an atheist prior to contemplating the amazing complexity of the human eye.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43pQSZ4tVbM
Really? You are going to trot out the old eye canard? Please get some education.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Gordon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18231
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51526 on: September 09, 2024, 06:54:10 PM »

torridon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10203
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51527 on: September 09, 2024, 08:55:31 PM »
  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D

Alan Burns

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10181
  • I lay it down of my own free will. John 10:18
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51528 on: September 09, 2024, 10:29:22 PM »
Reproduction doesn't need to be sexual. Bacteria are vastly simpler than even the simplest eukaryotic cell and they mostly reproduce asexually. People have set up test tube experiments in which RNA was able to reproduce with just a few enzymes. Who knows how much simpler you could go.
The question I posed was how simple cell reproduction can somehow organise itself to facilitate sexual reproduction.
Quote
Really? You are going to trot out the old eye canard? Please get some education.
The internationally acclaimed laser eye specialist was speculating upon how trilllions of cells need to line up perfectly to facilitate the working of the eye - if just one of those cells was out of alignment the person would be born blind.  Dr Wang's life story has been made into a film entitled "Sight".  A you seriously suggesting that Dr Wang needs to get some education?
« Last Edit: September 09, 2024, 10:48:20 PM by Alan Burns »
The truth will set you free  - John 8:32
Truth is not an abstraction, but a person - Edith Stein
Free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. - CS Lewis
Joy is the Gigantic Secret of Christians - GK Chesterton

Gordon

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18231
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51529 on: September 09, 2024, 10:55:17 PM »
The question I posed was how simple cell reproduction can somehow organise itself to facilitate sexual reproduction.

Just happens, Alan - just biology doing it's stuff without having to be 'organised'.

Quote
The internationally acclaimed laser eye specialist was speculating upon how trilllions of cells need to line up perfectly to facilitate the working of the eye - if just one of those cells was out of alignment the person would be born blind.  Dr Wang's life story has been made into a film entitled "Sight".  A you seriously suggesting that Dr Wang needs to get some education?

Yet he's presumably made a career out of fixing dodgy eyes - think about that! That he's caught a dose of Christianity is a separate issue.

jeremyp

  • Admin Support
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32360
  • Blurb
    • Sincere Flattery: A blog about computing
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51530 on: September 10, 2024, 03:19:29 AM »
The question I posed was how simple cell reproduction can somehow organise itself to facilitate sexual reproduction.
The eukaryotic cell appears to be a composite of several simpler cells. Whatever the process, it isn’t just a cell evolving in the way you seem to think.

Quote
The internationally acclaimed laser eye specialist was speculating upon how trilllions of cells need to line up perfectly to facilitate the working of the eye - if just one of those cells was out of alignment the person would be born blind.

That’s complete nonsense. People can see to at least some extent with all sorts of eye defects. I, for example, have slight astigmatism which is more than one cell out of alignment and yet I can still see imperfectly without spectacles.
Quote
  Dr Wang's life story has been made into a film entitled "Sight".  A you seriously suggesting that Dr Wang needs to get some education?

If you are accurately reporting his views, then yes, he needs some education. But I was actually talking about you. The nonsense about the impossibility of eye evolution has been debunked many times over, not least by Charles Darwin.
This post and all of JeremyP's posts words certified 100% divinely inspired* -- signed God.
*Platinum infallibility package, terms and conditions may apply

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14534
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51531 on: September 10, 2024, 12:28:46 PM »
The question I posed was how simple cell reproduction can somehow organise itself to facilitate sexual reproduction.

It doesn't 'organise itself'. It mutates, and most of those mutations are either non-viable or provide no benefit, and some of those disappear from the genetic record quickly, some hang around, and some flourish. Their descendants then do or don't make use of them, and some of them therefore become the new norm for at least a branch of the family. No-one is 'organising' it, there is no plan, there's just random change and subsequent pruning.

Quote
The internationally acclaimed laser eye specialist was speculating upon how trilllions of cells need to line up perfectly to facilitate the working of the eye - if just one of those cells was out of alignment the person would be born blind.

I have an astigmatism. The whole shape of the lens of my eyes are distorted from spherical, by definition a misalignment of millions of cells. Either he's lying, or he's stupid, or you're inaccurately reflecting what he's saying, because whilst I wear glasses for practical improvements I'm a world away from being blind.

Quote
Dr Wang's life story has been made into a film entitled "Sight".  A you seriously suggesting that Dr Wang needs to get some education?

Maybe. In science or ethics. Or, more likely, you need to get an education, given past performance on your inability to grasp the basics of how evolution works I think the most likely explanation here is that you've misunderstood.

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63974
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51532 on: September 10, 2024, 01:24:46 PM »
Just to note I'm another astigmatic

Stranger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8236
  • Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51533 on: September 10, 2024, 01:26:38 PM »
The question I posed was how simple cell reproduction can somehow organise itself to facilitate sexual reproduction.

The internationally acclaimed laser eye specialist was speculating upon how trilllions of cells need to line up perfectly to facilitate the working of the eye - if just one of those cells was out of alignment the person would be born blind.  Dr Wang's life story has been made into a film entitled "Sight".  A you seriously suggesting that Dr Wang needs to get some education?

This kind of argument is just odd. I mean apart from the misunderstanding of things "organising themselves" and the fact that the complexity of the eye being a seriously old and many, many times discredited anti-evolution idea.

I don't believe that you deny evolution happened, so why would a God create a universe in which it looks exactly like evolution is a full explanation of the diversity and features of life, but which it had to somehow tinker with because it doesn't quite work?

Surely it would make far more sense to either to not use evolution at all (especially considering all the suffering it involves) or design things better in the first place, so there's no need for tinkering with it along the way?

x(∅ ∈ x ∧ ∀y(yxy ∪ {y} ∈ x))

Dicky Underpants

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4352
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51534 on: September 30, 2024, 02:44:25 PM »

Here is an interesting short video of a top eye surgeon who was an atheist prior to contemplating the amazing complexity of the human eye.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43pQSZ4tVbM

Strange that 'God' did a rather better job in organising the eye of the octopus. A more interesting question would be how two rather similar organs came to be on two totally divergent lines of evolution (diverging from a common ancestor hundreds of millions of years ago, AFAIk). However, the phenomenon of parallel evolution in totally diverse genera is well known, and evolutionary biologists have gone a long way to explaining this without the need for supernatural guidance.
"Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous.”

Le Bon David

Spud

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7122
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51535 on: October 03, 2024, 08:32:42 AM »
Strange that 'God' did a rather better job in organising the eye of the octopus.
Lifespan of (giant) octopus eye: 3-5 years
Lifespan of human eye: 73.16 years global average.

torridon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10203
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51536 on: October 03, 2024, 09:42:47 AM »
Lifespan of (giant) octopus eye: 3-5 years
Lifespan of human eye: 73.16 years global average.

This is nonsense.  The lifespans quoted relate to the typical lifespans of the organism, not the eye.  Clearly when an organism dies, the eyes die with them.

Sebastian Toe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7706
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51537 on: October 03, 2024, 01:01:27 PM »
Lifespan of (giant) octopus eye: 3-5 years
Lifespan of human eye: 73.16 years global average.
Lifespan of giant tortoise eye: 100 years.
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends.'
Albert Einstein

Alan Burns

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10181
  • I lay it down of my own free will. John 10:18
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51538 on: October 28, 2024, 03:49:10 PM »
An interesting witness from Peter Hitchens

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnIH4gomOqc
The truth will set you free  - John 8:32
Truth is not an abstraction, but a person - Edith Stein
Free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. - CS Lewis
Joy is the Gigantic Secret of Christians - GK Chesterton

Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3869
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51539 on: October 28, 2024, 04:35:33 PM »
An interesting witness from Peter Hitchens

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnIH4gomOqc

In the interests of balance , this is Dan Barker's contribution from the same Oxford Union debate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btJazTimH4M

Incidentally, for your information, this debate was entitled "This House Believes In God", and it was lost by 168 to 143
Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright

Alan Burns

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10181
  • I lay it down of my own free will. John 10:18
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51540 on: October 29, 2024, 12:48:22 PM »
In the interests of balance , this is Dan Barker's contribution from the same Oxford Union debate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btJazTimH4M

Incidentally, for your information, this debate was entitled "This House Believes In God", and it was lost by 168 to 143
Having watched this recording of Dan Barker I have to conclude that during his ministry, Dan did not get to know God, because all his arguments show a complete lack of understanding of so many points - the timeless nature needed for the source of all existence - the historical evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus (whom he tries to pass off as a fabrication). - the origins of our perception of truth and morality - the true improbabilities within the fine tuning arguments - the demonstrable reality of human free will - the lack of understanding of evil and the power of evil .... I could go on.

I have no doubt that Dan Barker is sincere in his beliefs. but the current popularity of atheism has elevated his arguments to a much higher degree than they deserve.

From the same debate, this was the thought provoking contribution from Professor John Lennox:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=otrqzITuSqE

Considering the current climate where atheism has become much more fashionable, I was not surprised that the vote went against the motion.  What did surprise me was how close it was.
The truth will set you free  - John 8:32
Truth is not an abstraction, but a person - Edith Stein
Free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. - CS Lewis
Joy is the Gigantic Secret of Christians - GK Chesterton

Maeght

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5674
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51541 on: October 29, 2024, 12:52:12 PM »
Hearing Prof Lennox speak certainly provokes thoughts in me, but probably not the kind of thoughts you were thinking.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2024, 12:57:57 PM by Maeght »

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63974
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51542 on: October 29, 2024, 01:05:35 PM »
Having watched this recording of Dan Barker I have to conclude that during his ministry, Dan did not get to know God, because all his arguments show a complete lack of understanding of so many points - the timeless nature needed for the source of all existence - the historical evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus (whom he tries to pass off as a fabrication). - the origins of our perception of truth and morality - the true improbabilities within the fine tuning arguments - the demonstrable reality of human free will - the lack of understanding of evil and the power of evil .... I could go on.

I have no doubt that Dan Barker is sincere in his beliefs. but the current popularity of atheism has elevated his arguments to a much higher degree than they deserve.

From the same debate, this was the thought provoking contribution from Professor John Lennox:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=otrqzITuSqE

Considering the current climate where atheism has become much more fashionable, I was not surprised that the vote went against the motion.  What did surprise me was how close it was.
The lack of a coherent definition for a god is all that prompts my atheism.

And a big hello to the No True Scotsman fallacy.

« Last Edit: October 29, 2024, 01:07:55 PM by Nearly Sane »

Enki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3869
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51543 on: October 29, 2024, 02:20:54 PM »
Having watched this recording of Dan Barker I have to conclude that during his ministry, Dan did not get to know God, because all his arguments show a complete lack of understanding of so many points - the timeless nature needed for the source of all existence - the historical evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus (whom he tries to pass off as a fabrication). - the origins of our perception of truth and morality - the true improbabilities within the fine tuning arguments - the demonstrable reality of human free will - the lack of understanding of evil and the power of evil .... I could go on.

I have no doubt that Dan Barker is sincere in his beliefs. but the current popularity of atheism has elevated his arguments to a much higher degree than they deserve.

From the same debate, this was the thought provoking contribution from Professor John Lennox:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=otrqzITuSqE

Considering the current climate where atheism has become much more fashionable, I was not surprised that the vote went against the motion.  What did surprise me was how close it was.

Again, in the interests of balance, here is another speaker(Dr Michael Shermer) against the motion from the same debate:

https://tinyurl.com/4u9hubts

 :)
Sometimes I wish my first word was 'quote,' so that on my death bed, my last words could be 'end quote.'
Steven Wright

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63974
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51544 on: October 29, 2024, 02:42:37 PM »
Again, in the interests of balance, here is another speaker(Dr Michael Shermer) against the motion from the same debate:

https://tinyurl.com/4u9hubts

 :)

As a general point that I used to make when the earlier Alan/Alien used to cite how good William Lane Craig was at debating atheists, debating is a skill, and WLC is effectively a professional at it. Sounding good, and having a slick speech and style has no bearing on the validity of the arguments. Vote before and after are also useless at such things.

The classic example of that one was the Stephen Fry, Christopher Hitchens debate against Anne Widdecombe and a random Bishop where it was a bit embarrassing.

If people want to put up speeches, I think they need to highlight what they think are the strong arguments and why.

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14534
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51545 on: October 29, 2024, 02:43:06 PM »
the timeless nature needed for the source of all existence

You only need a 'timeless nature' if you're going to presume some sort of deliberate, conscious, external agency. If you remove that preconception, the need for a timeless nature for that agency disappears. You are begging the question, here.

Quote
the historical evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus (whom he tries to pass off as a fabrication).

Verging on a straw man argument here. He does not pass of the life (and, by implication, the death) of Jesus as a fabrication, it's generally accepted that the Jesus myth is built upon the foundations of the life of a real person. The 'historical evidence' for the resurrection of Jesus is a bunch of stories from a not impartial religious group, an extended period after the purported event, making supernatural claims - that 'evidence' is not sufficient to support the conclusion that the story is true, and if it were you'd be an Muslim telling us about Mohammed's flying horse.

Quote
- the origins of our perception of truth and morality

You're welcome to go opine regarding that on the various threads here discussing it, but it's fairly clear that we don't have anything even vaguely approaching a widely accepted definitive explanation for where morality comes from or what it is. You have an opinion, obviously, but you don't have anywhere near enough justification - at least that you've shared here - to suggest that you're the arbiter of the reality of that topic.

Quote
- the true improbabilities within the fine tuning arguments

Another topic where it's been shown, here and elsewhere, that trying to be definitive about these probabilities runs into significant problems about assumptions you have to make about sample size. We know of precisely one universe, and have no basis for presuming one way or the other whether a) there might be any others, and b) whether there is any way it could have been different. As such, to suggest that there is a probabilistic judgement to be made is an overreach.

Quote
- the demonstrable reality of human free will

The fact that both the evidence and logic definitively demonstrate against the existence of free will suggests that you've not been paying attention, but then you don't really have a choice when you come at the topic with the preconceptions that you do.


Quote
- the lack of understanding of evil and the power of evil

Which is what? Imaginary second deity from your monotheism?

Quote
.... I could go on.

We've noticed...

Quote
I have no doubt that Dan Barker is sincere in his beliefs. but the current popularity of atheism has elevated his arguments to a much higher degree than they deserve.

So your evidence that his arguments are wrong, is the fact that more people are convinced by them than there used to be? It would seem that you perhaps don't understand how arguments work.

Quote
From the same debate, this was the thought provoking contribution from Professor John Lennox: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=otrqzITuSqE

I'm sure you did.

Quote
Considering the current climate where atheism has become much more fashionable, I was not surprised that the vote went against the motion.

So how come atheism's popularity is 'fashionable', but Christianity's popularity is 'faith'? Bit of a double standard, perhaps?

Quote
What did surprise me was how close it was.

Unfortunately, Christianity's (and religion in general) fashionable nature has proven almost as difficult to shake off as flared trousers and mullet haircuts - every time you think you've seen the welcome departure it comes around again.

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

torridon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10203
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51546 on: October 30, 2024, 03:44:46 AM »
Having watched this recording of Dan Barker I have to conclude that during his ministry, Dan did not get to know God, because all his arguments show a complete lack of understanding of so many points - the timeless nature needed for the source of all existence - the historical evidence for the life, death and resurrection of Jesus (whom he tries to pass off as a fabrication). - the origins of our perception of truth and morality - the true improbabilities within the fine tuning arguments - the demonstrable reality of human free will - the lack of understanding of evil and the power of evil .... I could go on.

..

Funny, then, that after all these thousands of opportunities to demonstrate free will, you have not managed to do so.

Alan Burns

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10181
  • I lay it down of my own free will. John 10:18
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51547 on: October 30, 2024, 12:53:28 PM »
Funny, then, that after all these thousands of opportunities to demonstrate free will, you have not managed to do so.
I demonstrate it in every post I consciously compose.
Do you honestly believe that every moment thought you engage has been entirely defined before you even think it?
If so how can you possibly give credence to your own thoughts - and pass judgement on other people's thoughts?
I know these points have been made before but as yet there has been no credible answer.
The truth will set you free  - John 8:32
Truth is not an abstraction, but a person - Edith Stein
Free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. - CS Lewis
Joy is the Gigantic Secret of Christians - GK Chesterton

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14534
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51548 on: October 30, 2024, 02:44:54 PM »
A
I demonstrate it in every post I consciously compose.

You can assert that as much as you'd like, but saying it doesn't make it so.

Quote
Do you honestly believe that every moment thought you engage has been entirely defined before you even think it?

Effectively, yes. It is an inevitable consequence of the multitude of factors that affect it, each of which is mechanistic in nature.

Quote
If so how can you possibly give credence to your own thoughts - and pass judgement on other people's thoughts?

Because an argument stands or falls on its merits, not on the character or condition of the person making it. That I might be an inevitable quirk of circumstance is irrelevant to the reasoning that underpins my case.

Quote
I know these points have been made before but as yet there has been no credible answer.

There have been many, many credible answers. Several people, in several different ways, have shown why you can have will, you can have freedom, but you cant' have both. Several people have pointed you in the direction of the scientific evidence that our brains have come up with our conclusion long before (in neurological terms) we become conscious of it. And many, many, many people have pointed out that your very sincere belief that you have free will is not in any meaningful way reliable evidence for the existence of free will.

So apart from all the credible answers, and the highlighting of your attempt to respond with arguments from personal incredulity... no.

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

Étienne d'Angleterre

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 757
Re: Searching for GOD...
« Reply #51549 on: October 30, 2024, 02:47:20 PM »
I demonstrate it in every post I consciously compose.
Do you honestly believe that every moment thought you engage has been entirely defined before you even think it?
If so how can you possibly give credence to your own thoughts - and pass judgement on other people's thoughts?
I know these points have been made before but as yet there has been no credible answer.

No. That demonstrates that you posted something. We want a demonstration of your version of free will that you claim is demonstrable. I e if time were rewound to immediately before your last post you could have posted something different a d it also not be random. It is your claim that this free will is demonstrable so all that is being asked is that you demonstrate it